Phillips, Darrell Wayne

• Court: Court of Appeals of Texas
• Decided: March 9, 2015
• Docket: PD-0255-15
• Status: Published

Opinion

2. S5'(S No. 02-14-00498-CR (Case No. 0557784D) ORIGINAL

EXPARTE From the FILED IN SECOND DISTRICT COURT DARRELL WAYNE PHILLIPS COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS

V. MAR 09 2315 COURT OF APPEALS IN

THE STATE OF TEXAS Abel Acosta, Clerk TARRANT COUNTY^E^§JVED 0M COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS MAR 09 2015 REQUEST "FOR"DISCRETIONARY-REVIEW

TO THE HONORABLE CRIMINAL COURT OF APPEALS: SSt

COMES NOW, FOR CONSIDERATIONS: the petitioner in the above styled and numbered cause and case, without the assistance of counsel, respectfully ask for this Criminal Court's considerations and judicial powers: To instruct the lower Courts to make the District Clerk's docket recordings available for its examinations, concerning [Appellant]-Petitioner's DNA proceedings on filings by all parties involved, including the Court's Reporters Record for purposes of determinations as to; "Whether defendant [Appellant] made timely filings in this case, and issues warrant a remand."

The Appellant's Appeal in this cause challenges the fundamental fairness of his entire proceedings. The Statutory and Constitutional violations that involves "False misleadings and Misconduct" affecting the fairness of his DNA Trial proceedings. See DarrelT Wayne Phillips, No.0557784D (213th Dist. Fort Worth, Tex. May 2, 2014); See also additional Pro se filings, Objections and Request for Evidentiary considerations,, ie to correct falsehood( June 9, 2014, July 6, 2014-through^January 22, 2015, id State v Phillips and In re Darrell Wayne Phillips, No.02-14-00498-CR(2nd Dist. Ft. Worth, Tex. Jan. 22, 2015) Dismissing Appeals due to Appellant's untimely filings and Attorney of Record filingss agreeing that the Court lack jurisdiction in this matterl The Appellant-Petitioner must be allowed a hearing to show that any and all untimiely filings allegations, in this matter was not his fault or true. That he has shown great diligence on his part to asure the Honorable justices in this matter, that he does not wish to abandon [t]his Appeal, and didnot file any document agreeing the Appeal should be dismissed for lack of jurisdiction.

The Appellant was not appointed Counsel and didnot consent to or consult with any attorney concerning this case. Appellant didnot recieve notice or possess any documentations from the Courts or alleged appointed counsel who file documents in appellant's behal, without the appellant's concient.

CONCLUSIONS

WHEREFORE, PROMISES CONSIDERED, the Petitioner prays the Honorable Court of Criminal Appeals Grant this request, in all fairness, order that required records be submitted for a determination of remand and reversal of Appeals Court't dismissal.

Respectfully submitted

Darrell W. Phillips #712352 Huntsville 815 12th Street Huntsville, Tx, 77348

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I do hereby certify thaT ON THE DAY OF 2015 a true and correct copy of the foregoing Request was forwarded to the attorney for State Tarrant Count. Texas

Darrell W. Phillips ID# 712352 H/V unit

(2) No. 02-14-00498-CR (Case NO.0557784D)

STATE OF TEXAS IN THE CRIMINAL COURT

V. OF APPEALS

DARRELL WAYNE PHILLIPS AUSTIN, TEXAS

ORDER

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND DECREED that the foregoing Request for Discretionary Review is hereby GRANTED / DENIED on this the day of 2015.

Judge presiding COURT OF APPEALS SECOND DISTRICT OF TEXAS FORT WORTH

NO. 02-14-00489-CR

DARRELL WAYNE PHILLIPS APPELLANT

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS STATE

FROM THE 213TH DISTRICT COURT OF TARRANT COUNTY TRIAL COURT NO. 0557784D

MEMORANDUM OPINION1

On June 9, 2014, the trial court denied appellant's pro se motion

requesting DNA testing, which he filed under chapter 64 of the code of criminal

procedure.2 After the due date for a notice of appeal but within the time period

1SeeTex. R. App. P. 47.4. 2See Tex. Code Crim. Proc. Ann. arts. 64.01-05 (West 2006 & Supp. 2014). for requesting an extension of time to file a notice of appeal, appellant filed a

notice of appeal.3 See Tex. R. App. P. 26.2(a)(1), 26.3; see also Swearingen v. State, 189 S.W.3d 779, 781 (Tex. Crim. App. 2006) ("[A] DNA movant must meet

applicable filing and time requirements found in the Rules of Appellate

Procedure."). But he did not file a timely motion to extend the time to file his

notice of appeal. See Tex. R. App. P. 26.3. Later, appellant filed a "subsequent"

notice of appeal. The trial court appointed counsel to represent appellant on

appeal.

On December 5, 2014, we sent a letter to appellant that expressed our

concern that we lack jurisdiction because the notice of appeal was not timely.

We informed appellant that unless he filed a response showing grounds for

continuing the appeal, it could be dismissed. Appellant filed a response in which

he agreed that we lack jurisdiction and conceded that dismissal is appropriate.

Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal for want of jurisdiction. See Tex. R. App. P.

25.2(b), 26.2(a), 26.3(b), 43.2(f); see also Olivo v. State, 918 S.W.2d 519, 522

(Tex. Crim. App. 1996) ("When a notice of appeal is filed within the fifteen-day

[extension] period but no timely motion for extension of time is filed, the appellate

court lacks jurisdiction."); Brock v. State, No. 02-14-00310-CR, 2014 WL

Appellant's original notice of appeal bears a file-stamped date of July 22, 2014. His certificate of service on the notice of appeal states that he sent it to the district clerk on July 13, 2014. 5492730, at *1 (Tex. App.—Fort Worth Oct. 30, 2014, no pet.) (mem. op., not

designated for publication) (applying Olivo).

PER CURIAM

PANEL: LIVINGSTON, C.J.; DAUPHINOT and GARDNER, JJ.

DO NOT PUBLISH Tex. R. App. P. 47.2(b)

DELIVERED: January 22, 2015